Why do so many only focus on the loss a team has? Where is this written as the deciding factor? What about the quality of the wins, too? Why not look at all 12/13 games each team played, not just one?
Last edited:
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked Is anyone else blowing off the MNC game??
- Thread starter CTBugeater
- Start date
- Status
Why do so many only focus on the loss a team has? Where is this written as the deciding factor? What about the quality of the wins, too? Why not look at all 12/13 games each team played, not just one?
Ouch. That's going a little overboard, in my opinion. I'm not saying that OSU got "jobbed", I just don't like the current system. There are arguments for a number of teams, Alabama included. I remember the uproar about Nebraska being in the Championship game in 2001 even though they didn't win their conference. Now, we have a team that not only didn't win their conference, didn't even win their division. Again, I'm not saying that Alabama isn't a good team, afterall, the team they lost to is definitely better than the team OSU lost to. It's just that there are other teams that aren't conference division opponents who already played LSU late in the season, at home, with horrible special teams.
Now, with respect to the overboard statements - At least you said "arguably" but I don't know what your argument is. Many, if not most, would contend that the Big XII is as good as, if not better than, the SEC this year. The conference is rated by many as the best conference. To say that it's the weakest Big XII since its inception is saying that all of college football is pretty bad this year. Otherwise, the "stronger" Big XII years should have resulted in more national championships. Second, OSU didn't need Stanford's kicker to miss the FG to avoid their 2nd loss, they needed the miss to avoid overtime, which could have resulted in a win or a loss. Additionally, a close game against the number 4 team in the system used to determine the national championship game means it was a very good team they beat.
In this case, because losing to a 6-7 Iowa State team, basically IMHO, outweighs anything positive OSU accomplished this season................lets not forget they struggled with aTm and KSU........they were a good team but they will finish exactly where they belong #3
Exactly my point. The ISU comment proves my point...it's all in the eye of the beholder, and what you are basically saying is that "Every Game Counts" if it's Iowa State but if it's LSU you get a do-over? No thanks.
Besides, while I said the OSU/Alabama argument is irrelevant, and I have certainly seen a number of statistics that suggest OSU had more quality wins than Bama, here's what I would say about the one loss: For Alabama, you have a game that going in is not only the biggest one on your calendar but is widely recognized as a de facto MNC play-in game. On your home turf. If you can't get up for and play your best in those conditions, do you deserve another shot at it? Meanwhile, OSU had a Friday night road game in Ames. As someone who was there in person to watch Marv Seiler run all over the Blackshirts in 1992 you know anything can happen there, and we all know from very recent experience that Paul Rhoads thrives in these situations. OSU also had just experienced a tragedy within their athletic department, and while no one at OSU scapegoated that it's reasonable to assume it might have weighed on the minds of some players.
So, which loss is more unforgivable? Losing a game you KNOW is your shot at a MNC at home or letting your guard down against a less-talented conference opponent on the road? Again, it's all a beauty contest and Iowa State just looks worse to the masses.
Bottom line - Bama had their chance and they lost.
I would go along with the fact that OSU beat a VERY good Stanford team..................I would also say.......Stanford ain't LSU or ALABAMA
Again, maybe Bama did play their best................and lost to consensus #1 in OT.................It seems to me that based on the fact there are no other undefeateds, and no one else lost to the #1 team in OT, that without a playoff, Alabama is clearly #2
this is a no brainer. The Big 12 was as weak as it has ever been this year which is FACT.
Explain this.
NO Nebraska.
Texas off back to back down years.
OU was a shell of the team that started the year. They were decimated by injuries. While I dont blame OSU for having to beat up on a lesser OU team, the fact is, they did.
Mizzu didnt have one of their better teams in recent years.
Texas A&M...was a giant pile of dung.
Baylor and K-State had nice years but other than that the Big 12 was down. OSU had their destiny in their own hands and went to Ames and laid an egg against a mediocre ISU team. Had they won that game they could have played LSU. They didnt. They didnt get jobbed, snubbed or passed over. They choked.
After that, all i heard was how they were going to make a statement in the Fiesta bowl. They sure did, they needed a 35 yard FG Miss by Stanford as time expired to escape another loss. There is ZERO arugment that can be made by OSU fan. ZERO.
Last edited:
But, how do you know that "Stanford ain't LSU or ALABAMA?" Stanford didn't play either team, nor did they play any SEC teams. That's the point that many of us are making. The selection is somewhat arbitrary, and based on biases and assumptions about teams and conferences.
There is nothing biased about asking "Of the ONE loss teams, who lost to the highest ranked opponent"?
Sure anyone can beat anyone on any given day......see ISU-OSU, but we are asking who is most deserving of the #2 spot given what we have to go off of...........
Alabama--------------------------lost to LSU in OT
Boise-----------------------------lost to TCU
OSU------------------------------lost to ISU in OT
looking at it this way.......I think Boise should have made it before OSU.......
Personally, I think Oregon would have been the best able to match up with LSU, but they lost twice
There is absolutely nothing clear about determining who is more deserving between OSU and Bama. The Big 12 was ranked by Sagarin as the strongest conference in the country this season, by a considerable margin over the SEC. Neither LSU nor Bama played a single team from that top conference (though the SEC's third best team, Arkansas, did struggle to barely beat the Big 12's seventh best team, aTm). OSU won that top conference and ended the season with the same number of losses as did Bama. Should not winning the country's strongest conference warrant a place in the BCS NC game over a team with the same record that did not even win a weaker conference? The winner of the nation's strongest conference being beaten out of a BCS spot by the non-winner of a weaker conference with the same record is probably unprecedented in the history of the BCS. Throw in the fact that such second place team has already lost to the team already in the NC game, but still gets selected over the champion of the strongest conference, and it is almost too unfair to believe. And you say the choice of that second place team is "clear"??? Everything is black or white, eh?
obviously you cant always look at common opponents to make the whole story but I watched LSU handle Oregon's speed and Offense, I also watched Stanford fail to do the same against Oregon. I think its safe to say Stanford is no LSU when it comes to team speed and defense.
Who struggled with aTm more???? Oklahoma St or Arkansas
- Status
